Perhaps the pyramid symbolises Islam?In which case the four faces for climbing it would be the four madhabs.Perhaps Nasrudin is up the tree enjoying himself and imagining his participation while really just avoiding responsibility?

Uthman, the 4 madhabs/ four faces point is good. Thanks for adding that.

Two different and seemingly-opposite interpretations:

[1] Uthman is right. Nasruddin is the classic archetype of the person who professes religion without making it part of his life or really following its path seriously. What he says (and maybe even thinks) he's doing and what he's really doing are 2 different things.

[2] Per our Zen Wisdom quote this week, Nasruddin has already worked to reach a state where he has learned that climbing the "pyramid" of spiritual achievement can be done anywhere. Having reached this level, he abandons the rigid construct of the pyramid to celebrate and participate in spiritual achievement surrounded by his Creator's blessings.

I know what a pyramid is.

An Egyptian pyramid us a sacred representation of the primal earth-mound of creation, that is, solidity, reality, foundations, rising above the original (or pre-origin-al) waters of creation (or chaos).

The opinions of a sufi sage, a zen master, a western dilettante committed neither to the four noble truths nor to Islam but playing with sufi and zen poses anyway, and a monkey chattering in a tree are all the same in relation to an Egyptian pyramid.

If the babbler in the tree would worship Ptah and/or other appropriate gods, or God (from an ancient Egyptian point of view) in the right spirit and with proper rites, and uphold Ma'at (truth, justice, harmony), he could enter a right relationship with the cosmos (understood as a colossal temple), and build a pyramid or a temple himself anywhere: a part to represent the whole, and a house for God.

The Egyptians did build temples and pyramids all over the place, from their point of view. The location of the one and only original earth mound could be in your city, any city.

However it is natural for the poser and the paradox-spinner to remain babbling up a tree, far from either roots or foundations.

And that's fine. There's no need for him to physically approach a real temple, a real pyramid. Because even if he physically climbed then all, he would not really be approaching them, any more than a monkey really approaches the science of botany because he climbs trees.

Without the proper foundations, including mental foundations - nothing is valid.

You can mix baseless, rootless poses and paradoxes all you like, but from an Egyptian point of view that's all unreality, non-existence, and the pyramid, rightly understood, is reality - the business of gods and the proper concern of humanity.

Ancient Egypt is among the earliest, most enduring, most noble and beautiful forms of sanctuary, that is, civilisation in the best sense.

On: "sanctuary":
http://www.ejectejecteject.com/archives/000125.html
http://www.ejectejecteject.com/archives/000126.html

I think that to a great extent, Egyptian religious perspectives are timelessly valid, like the beauty of Egyptian art. (Which need not imply a disdain for progress: I can trace a line from Ancient Egypt through Art Deco to the aesthetics of retro-futurism in Star Wars Episodes I, II and III.)

As Bill Whittle said, Pharaoh would be amazed and delighted by a modern 7-11. And this is fine. According to Egyptian ideas, we are partners with the gods in creating Good Stuff. If you keep building stuff for a long time, it's natural for good to come of it.

Genghis Khan, the triumphant barbarian, brooking no obstruction and entranced by nothing but the freedom of the plain, a hawk and a swift horse, would have had quite a different attitude to the 7-11: loot everything that can be moved, destroy the rest, enslave all with skills clearly of use in the further subjugation of civilisation, slaughter the rest, and move on, leaving nothing behind but a blacked ruin.

These two orientations are not the same.

An Egyptian pyramid is not interchangeably a symbol of the savage barbarian raider and the desert nomad - except perhaps in the opinion of the plundering hordes: those who refuse to acknowledge and respect the boundaries, barriers and distinctions that it is the business of Pharaoh's army to uphold by violence.

Nasrudin strikes me as a happy fool. Much like the Zen monk Ryokan, he understands the importance of not being earnest, and of showing without pointing.